Not a naval architect so I’m asking ‘cause I don’t know. Why not build a carrier in a catamaran design? Granted it would be unable to traverse the Panama and Suez but I would think that it would provide a huge increase in flight deck.
Catamaran! and have PETA attacking the Navy for abusing felines and decrying that so many cats will have to be killed to provide building materials for the catamaran that it will be a virtual extinction/genocide of the world’s cat population....Definitely NOT (however I have two obnoxious cats to donate to the cause if it happens.)
These vessels are already over 250 ft wide at the flight deck. They have to be able to do several things that a CAT or Trimaren design would not accommodate. The biggest is their structural integrity with the massive weight, and particularly regarding their ability to take hits from torpedoes.
In addition, the structural integrity for the hanger spaces in heavy seas is much more sound with the current design.
These vessels have been very well honed over decades and this new design is significantly advanced over even the Nimitz class which precedes it in several areas.
Well, there you go.
A vast amount of a carriers below decks space beside the Engineering Plants and berth areas is storage rooms and fuel tanks. Even the nukes carry fuel. As well the piping and wiring logistics alone would be a nightmare. BTW as far as I know no carriers go through Panama. That's why east coast carriers head east and transit through The MED and Suez. We even did without the Suez carrier wise from The Six Day War - 1981 when the America went through.
Why not just make the carrier fly?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helicarrier
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XKdTQKN_zY
Making large cats is a difficult engineering problem. They also have limited space below the main deck. CVN’s have enormous space under the flight deck.
http://www.mbari.org/news/news_releases/1999/sep01_wf.html